Heisenberg wrote:For clarity too, I don't know if I would refer to timing as high frequency and inevitability as low frequency. This may be my ignorance but, from my perspective by just watching the video repeatedly, it is that when our signal ("energy metric") is looked at in narrow time spans there is a wide range of possible frequencies that could describe our signal (there is no clear dominant frequency) this is represented as a very "spread out" FT whereas when we look at the signal over larger periods of time the FT is more "narrow" and the dominant frequency becomes clear. In the video 6:51-7:03 displays this. John's model is based on incredibly long periods of time and thus the dominant frequency becomes evident (80 years). We would want to concentrate on smaller time windows, obviously, and thus the dominant frequency we are observing in those time windows becomes less clear (more possible frequencies describe the signal). We would want to filter out all the noise to be able to find the most likely dominant frequency that would describe the signal and thus give us a better idea of how it will fluctuate in the future.
Long "normal" Lifespan = 88ish years
Influential "normal" life-period = 58ish years
Procreational "generative" life-period = 22ish years
Freakinʻ Sunspot period = 11ish years
The "ish-ness" of these cycles makes them hard to deal with AS cycles. It seems like perhaps it may be better to see a "terrain", composed of "soils and lumpy structures", that is "weathered" by those "organic cycles" that produce the highly variable "resultant cycles" that are predicted by GD.
In other words, a "landform" is created by the "GD Weather/Hydrology/Geology" that describes (as an instantaneous/moment picture) the past and probable near future (or further) of a particular location on that landform.
What are the "movers" of GD theory? Emotions. Mostly, it seems, "frustrations". That could be the "water" that seasonally gets dumped on the "terrain". What it "pushes" around might be populations or institutions that create hills (barriers) or valleys (flow-ways), that build or erode over time.
Iʻm fishing here, quite obviously. Visualizing, or better yet "tactile-izing", the "tendencies" described by GD theory would be quite useful.
There DO seem to be a LOT of dimensions to account for, though.